https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768986 The ITAT Mumbai dismissed the Revenue's appeal regarding disallowance of expenditure under Section 37. The tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s decision, finding that the assessee had already added back penalty/fine amounts while computing total income, making further disallowance unjustified double addition. Regarding contingent liability, the tribunal confirmed the assessee reported it in financial statements for disclosure purposes only, not claiming it as expense in profit/loss account or return. The CIT(A) correctly noted the tax auditor's inadvertent error in reporting and granted appropriate relief to the assessee. en-us Thu, 09 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2025 13:13:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768986 The ITAT Mumbai dismissed the Revenue's appeal regarding disallowance of expenditure under Section 37. The tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s decision, finding that the assessee had already added back penalty/fine amounts while computing total income, making further disallowance unjustified double addition. Regarding contingent liability, the tribunal confirmed the assessee reported it in financial statements for disclosure purposes only, not claiming it as expense in profit/loss account or return. The CIT(A) correctly noted the tax auditor's inadvertent error in reporting and granted appropriate relief to the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768986